Heuristic Evaluation Quality Review
Check an expert review for coverage, rigour and usefulness.
The Open buttons send the prompt text as currently shown below to that site only when you click. Fill in the placeholders first.
Audit a heuristic evaluation. Evaluation report: [EVALUATION_REPORT]. Evaluators and their experience: [EVALUATORS]. Screens or flows covered: [SCOPE]. Check that findings cite a specific location and the heuristic broken, severity ratings come with a stated scale and a reason, positive findings are included, duplicates between evaluators are merged, and preferences are separated from problems that affect users. Note how many evaluators took part and what that means for the number of issues likely missed. Check that the recommendations are specific enough to act on. Return a scorecard from 1 to 5 for coverage, specificity, severity logic, independence of evaluators and actionability, a list of findings to rewrite or drop, and a plan for a second pass or user testing to validate the highest-severity issues. Add a worked scoring of an invented report: coverage 3 because only four of ten heuristics are mentioned; specificity 4; severity logic 2, because ratings have no reason; independence 1, since one evaluator did all the work; actionability 3. Total 13 out of 25, 52 percent. A single evaluator typically finds only a fraction of the issues, so recommend two or three evaluators or follow-up testing with users. List five findings rewritten with location, heuristic, evidence and fix. Add a closing step: have two evaluators merge their lists and record agreement, then validate the top five issues with five users.
Fill in before use
Optional: type your details and the prompt above updates. Nothing is saved or sent.
Replace each bracketed placeholder with your own details, then paste into Any AI or another assistant.